Robert Leo Clavin v. Darlene Gibson Clavin, 1324202

Parties married 1998; divorce decree (July 2019) awarded husband spousal support obligations ($2,000/month) and required husband to pay $25,000 of wife’s attorneys’ fees; neither party appealed the decree.
Husband is sole employee of a home-building business operating under a colleague’s contractor license; divorce decree reflected husband’s annual income at $74,777; wife earned about $34,000 at divorce and later increased to ~$45,000.
Wife petitioned repeatedly for contempt for missed spousal-support payments; husband admitted nonpayment for April–September 2020 ($12,000 arrearage) and stipulated to the arrearage.
Husband sought reduction of spousal support based on alleged COVID-19-related income decline and a forgivable federal payroll loan of $15,514 to his company; the court found his financial disclosures incomplete and his testimony not credible.
Trial court found husband in contempt for nonpayment and for failing to return specified personal property (items awarded to wife in the unappealed divorce decree), ordered repayment/return and assessed attorneys’ fees; appealed.
Court of Appeals affirmed: denied modification, upheld contempt findings (willfulness and law-of-the-case for property), affirmed fee award and remanded to trial court to determine reasonable appellate fees and taxed costs to husband.

Issue	Clavin's Argument	Gibson's Argument	Held
Motion to reduce spousal support	COVID-related income drop and inability to pay warranted reduction	Husband failed to prove his income decline or that reduction was warranted; wife still needed support	Denied — court found material change but husband failed to prove change warranted modification; credibility and incomplete financial disclosure fatal to his claim
Contempt — nonpayment of support	Nonpayment was not willful; inability to pay due to business slowdown and debts	Husband willfully disobeyed order; he controlled payroll, received PPP loan, spent money investigating wife, and paid nothing for six months	Affirmed — trial court didn’t abuse discretion in finding willful contempt based on credibility and evidence
Contempt — failure to return property	Items not in his possession; court lacked proper pleading to order return	Divorce decree (unappealed) already awarded the items to wife; husband cannot relitigate	Affirmed — law-of-the-case bars relitigation of equitable-distribution orders; appellate waiver for any pleading-defect argument
Award of attorneys’ fees (trial and appellate)	Court abused discretion by not adequately considering his ability to pay	Fees appropriate given contempt, noncompliance, manipulation, and equities	Affirmed in part — fee award not an abuse of discretion; appellate court remanded to circuit court to determine reasonable appellate fees and taxed costs to husband

Schoenwetter v. Schoenwetter, 8 Va. App. 601 (Va. App. 1989) (moving party must prove both material change and that it warrants modification)
Street v. Street, 25 Va. App. 380 (Va. App. 1997) (court must consider need of dependent spouse and ability of supporting spouse)
Reece v. Reece, 22 Va. App. 368 (Va. App. 1996) (party seeking reduction must show inability to pay is not due to voluntary underemployment or neglect)
Moreno v. Moreno, 24 Va. App. 190 (Va. App. 1997) (appellate court gives deference to trial court findings on modification of support)
Zedan v. Westheim, 60 Va. App. 556 (Va. App. 2012) (contempt requires bad faith or willful disobedience)
Miller-Jenkins v. Miller-Jenkins, 276 Va. 19 (Va. 2008) (law-of-the-case doctrine bars relitigation of unappealed rulings)
Cirrito v. Cirrito, 44 Va. App. 287 (Va. App. 2004) (contemporaneous objection rule; issues not raised below are generally waived on appeal)
Carswell v. Materson, 224 Va. 329 (Va. 1982) (trial courts may award attorneys’ fees incurred to enforce divorce-related orders)